The podcast explores the legal battle over mifepristone, FDA approval, and telemedicine abortion, highlighting the impact on reproductive rights. Carrie N. Baker discusses the potential consequences of restricting access to abortion pills through mail. The show also covers legal challenges against former President Trump and his financial obligations.
Telemedicine and abortion pills enhance abortion access for low-income individuals facing barriers.
Court's involvement in medication abortion may impact drug development and scientific integrity.
Balancing pharmaceutical interests with abortion access challenges poses a crucial dilemma for the Supreme Court.
Deep dives
The Anti-Abortion Movement's Attack on Medication Abortion Access
Attacks on medication abortion access have intensified, driven by the anti-abortion movement's efforts to restrict abortion provisions to specific clinics. Telemedicine and abortion pills have revolutionized access, particularly benefiting low-income individuals who face financial and travel barriers. If telemedicine abortion is banned, access to abortions will be severely limited across the United States, impacting hundreds of thousands each year.
The Threat to Medication Abortion and Pharmaceutical Industry Concerns
The Supreme Court's involvement in medication abortion raises alarm within the pharmaceutical industry, warning of significant repercussions on drug development and scientific integrity. Pharmaceutical heavyweights emphasize the risks of interfering with FDA approvals and disrupting the industry's stability. The industry's opposition to arbitrary FDA challenges highlights the grave implications such actions could have on drug development investments and advancements.
Judicial Challenges and the Importance of FDA Decisions
Historically, the judiciary hasn't removed drugs based on FDA scientific decisions, highlighting the significant precedent upheld. While industry concerns may influence the court's approach, there's potential for a nuanced ruling to appease pharmaceutical interests while restricting medication abortion access. The court's delicate balance of honoring FDA decisions and addressing Comstock Act interpretations remains crucial in navigating this complex case.
The Anti-Abortion Movement's Strategy and Impacts of Medication Abortion
The anti-abortion movement's battle against medication abortion mirrors its historical tactics targeting abortion provisions. Efforts to restrict clinic access are countered by the transformative benefits of telemedicine and abortion pills, undermining the movement's traditional strategies of intimidation and clinic obstruction. The movement's focus on stigmatizing abortion faces challenges as medication abortion offers a discreet, accessible, and preferred option for many in need.
Potential Industry Influence on Court Decisions and Access to Abortion
The substantial influence of the pharmaceutical industry on court decisions regarding medication abortion access brings attention to industry investments and drug development stability. Balancing industry concerns with abortion access challenges presents a crucial dilemma for the Supreme Court. The interplay between pharmaceutical interests, FDA decisions, and potential restrictions underscores the multifaceted implications of the case on women's reproductive rights and the pharmaceutical field.
Well, it happened again. The hIgHeSt CoUrT will hear arguments Tuesday in a case based on made up facts! This time it’s mifepristone, the abortion drug at the center of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v FDA.
The claim was that the FDA approval process (three decades ago), for mifepristone, one of two medication abortion drugs, was haphazard and slapdash.. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine also argued that the FDA’s 2021 decision to allow telemedicine abortion and mailing of abortion pills violates a 19th-century anti-vice law called the Comstock Act.
This week on the show Dahlia Lithwick speaks with Carrie N. Baker, Smith College professor and author of the forthcoming book Abortion Pills: US History and Politics. Baker says taking away the rights to access abortion pills in the mail could have catastrophic consequences for pregnant people, drug development, and privacy for all Americans.
In this week’s subscribers-only segment, Slate’s Trump Law correspondent Jeremy Stahl gives us the updates on some of the cases against the former president - including the “a lot ton” of money he owes in New York, like starting on Monday.
